Players have been doing this since the beginning of ZE...I have been the recipient of both retiring and those retiring...the players have worked for what they have for fleet and resources...if they want to give it away or arrange to crash their fleet...that is up to them...some day, I will retire and will crash my fleet into my mates...if it becomes a bannable offense, the first person you should start with is Gozar...then me...then Destruction and Torgard, for we all have benefited from such actions.

i think zorg might like the idea of banning all top 5 players in any universe if they are willing

how hard did some players really work thopugh? you forget the number 1 accounts owners arnt the same as they used to be no? the orignal owners also gave those up when they left the game?

Joshanddrew wrote:how hard did some players really work thopugh? you forget the number 1 accounts owners arnt the same as they used to be no? the orignal owners also gave those up when they left the game?

so that is what you said

what i heard was

i am mad cause they didn't give me their accounts instead..

rich getting richer is the real issue everyone has..but that is how the world turns Top 2% of the worlds population controls 98% of the worlds wealth.Look across each server and that remains true in zorg and without periodic server resets will be that way till the end.

set the rules to read more clearly instead of vague descriptions and that will be that.

not even mad a little bit, i wouldnt like to have an account i didnt build up myself wheres the satisfaction in that?

-Death- wrote:...The spacemanspiff/dubberman/GoD plastered the stat page a few weeks ago clearly indicating a 'transfer' of res between then alliance mates...

For the record I received all the DF from the crashing of my own fleet except some I told GoD and dub to keep - just enough to rebuild some losses that they took. There was no other transfer of resources.


Having said that, I will also say that I am surprised Zorg that you have come out now stating that the situation under discussion is Milking because this kind of thing has been openly discussed in the forums before without any word or action from you, which gave the implicit impression that it was allowed.

I am ambivalent about retiring players feeding their fleets.

On the one hand, it certainly vicerally stinks of bad milk (pun intended). If player 1 starts a new account in bad faith and then feeds his fleet to player 2, and player 3 starts a new account in good faith and then decides to quit and feeds his fleet to player 2, the end result is the same: player 2 has received resources he did not have to work for.

On the other hand, I agree that vicerally it seems a player should be free to do what he wants with his own fleet.

I would also say here that it seems to me that there really is no difference between a retiring player crashing his fleet and leaving it to be crashed. It is just a trivial silly splitting of hairs. Either way there is no hunt and the resources are being spoon fed.

Also, it seems to me that this would be extremely hard to police. For example, how do you tell the difference between a player who decides to quit and leaves his fleet to be crashed, and a player who gets crashed and then decides to quit? If there is a pm trail to check, sure you can find out, but my point is if someone wants to circumvent the rule they can communicate out of game to avoid any in-game trail and make it look legit.

SpacemanSpiff wrote: how do you tell the difference between a player who decides to quit and leaves his fleet to be crashed, and a player who gets crashed and then decides to quit?

I think the issue would only be classed as milking if the leaving player sends their fleet to another, leaving it sitting would just be an ordinary fleetcrash,

The only way to police such an issue 100% is the implementation of mission history.

But I see that most are against and I do not see a reason to continue this talk further; things can remain as they have been so far; retiring players do what they want with their fleets.

Zorg wrote:The only way to police such an issue 100% is the implementation of mission history.

But I see that most are against and I do not see a reason to continue this talk further; things can remain as they have been so far; retiring players do what they want with their fleets.

Could you please confirm this applies only to people who will be leaving the game on a perma basis otherwise this ruling would be open to abuse for sure, thanks

Sprog wrote:

Zorg wrote:The only way to police such an issue 100% is the implementation of mission history.

But I see that most are against and I do not see a reason to continue this talk further; things can remain as they have been so far; retiring players do what they want with their fleets.

Could you please confirm this applies only to people who will be leaving the game on a perma basis otherwise this ruling would be open to abuse for sure, thanks

What about ninjas hmm? You will never know when someone messed up, or if they are acting like they did.